Friday, September 07, 2012

Still no answer:  Why was this British couple  locked up for three days?

There was clearly no likelihood of their conviction and no risk of them absconding.  It's just police bullying.  British police are scum these days

The couple arrested for opening fire on intruders who targeted their isolated cottage will not face charges, the Crown Prosecution Service announced last night.

Andy and Tracey Ferrie had been held on suspicion of grievous bodily harm after dialling 999 to report that they had discharged a shotgun when a four-man gang broke in to their home in the middle of the night.

The couple spent almost three days and nights in custody until they were released on bail late on Tuesday night.

Yesterday, hours after two men appeared in court charged with burglary in connection with the raid on the Ferries’ 200-year-old cottage, prosecutors said it was ‘clear’ the couple ‘did what they believed was necessary to protect themselves, and their home, from intruders’.

Judith Walker, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said the department had advised Leicestershire Police to release Mr and Mrs Ferrie from their bail.  Mrs Walker said: ‘I am satisfied that this is a case where householders, faced with intruders in frightening circumstances, acted in reasonable self-defence.’

At Loughborough Magistrates Court yesterday, Daniel Mansell, 33, admitted burgling the Ferries’ rented home.

She said stockily-built Mansell – who appeared to have his arm in a sling under a grey sweatshirt – was injured inside the property and arrested later at hospital in Leicester.

Mansell, from Leicester, was remanded into custody and the case was adjourned until September 25 at Leicester Crown Court.

Joshua O’Gorman, 27, gave no indication of plea and was remanded in custody to appear before magistrates on September 14.

Two other men, aged 23 and 31, who were arrested on suspicion  of aggravated burglary, have  been released on bail pending  further inquiries.


Toddler died of methadone overdose after social workers failed to take him away from heroin-addict parents

Britain's Marxist-trained social workers invent all sorts of reasons to take away children of decent parents but ferals can do no wrong.  To bad that some of their kids die

A toddler died from a methadone overdose after social workers failed to take him into care, a damning report revealed today.

Jayden Lee Green, who was just a month short of his second birthday, was found dead in his parents’ bed after overdosing on the heroin substitute in August last year.

The toddler, who was given the drug to sedate him, lived with his crack cocaine and heroin-addicted parents Jamie Green and Sonia Britton in a filthy flat in the St Georges area of Bristol.

A serious case review, commissioned by Bristol Safeguarding Children Board, found there was a lack of co-operation from Jayden Lee’s parents with all involved in dealing with them.

This included drug agencies, midwifery, housing, health visitors, social workers and there were also regular failures to keep appointments or be at home when visits were made.

The report stated: 'What was lacking was the authoritative challenge to this lack of co-operation, there was a lack of enforcement of consequences. There was a lack of challenge by practitioners across the range of agencies.'

The report, which referred to Jayden Lee as 'Child K' throughout, continued: 'The extent of the parents’ lack of engagement, avoidance and dishonesty grew over time and although this was recognised by practitioners there was insufficient challenge by professional and no sustained, planned approach to protecting the child.

'The only way that Child K’s death would definitely have been prevented was if he had been placed away from his parents.

'The opportunity to do this was lost due to the failure to follow through on the initiation of care proceedings. However, a better-planned and authoritative approach to the family may also have prevented his death.'

It was revealed today that Jayden Lee suffered two head injuries - one at seven weeks and one at 11 weeks - and his parents gave the same explanation.  The report stated that this should have raised concerns that the injuries were not accidental.

The boy also sustained injuries to his face at 21 and 23 months old and again the same explanations were given when he was seen by medical professionals.

Britton, 35, and Green, 33, were accused of killing their son by giving him the drug that they were both prescribed by doctors.

After a three week trial at Bristol Crown Court, Green was convicted of manslaughter and causing cruelty to a child and jailed for nine years.

The jury cleared Britton of manslaughter but convicted her of child cruelty and causing or allowing the death of a child. She was jailed for four years.

The trial heard that there were bags of rubbish lying around their one-bedroom ground floor rented flat, as well as drug paraphernalia kept in cupboards and crack pipes under the sink.

A rolled up cigarette was found in a child’s cot and there were also dirty potties.

Both his parents were prescribed methadone and scientific tests showed the fatal dose administered to Jayden Lee was not the first time he had been given the drug.

During the trial the court heard that several different agencies were monitoring Green and Britton in caring for their son but they were able to pull the wool over their eyes.

'Sonia Britton and Jamie Green were aware that health care professionals, drug workers as well as social services were monitoring their behaviour as well as trying to help them,' prosecutor William Mousley QC told jurors.

'They created an image with those professionals that they were looking after Jayden Lee. Of course nobody knew they were giving methadone to Jayden Lee.  'While both of them cared about Jayden Lee, he was not their priority. They were drug addicts, whose need for drugs came before Jayden Lee.'

The serious case review said there were a number of 'missed opportunities' for health and welfare professionals to 'fully understand the circumstances' of Jayden Lee’s home environment.

Before he was even born there were concerns that Britton was regularly injecting heroin while also taking methadone during the pregnancy.

Following his birth he became subject of a child protection plan but that was discontinued.  A second child protection plan was commenced but moves to take Jayden Lee into care were never initiated, the review said.

During this time Green and Britton continued to use heroin and methadone and were also were falsifying regular urine tests. They pair later admitted they 'knew the tricks to get around screening'.

'None of the professionals involved with the family had foreseen the possibility of either child being given methadone by one or other of their parents,' the serious case review said.

'There is some evidence through other serious case reviews and research that administration of methadone and other substances including alcohol to children by their parents may not be uncommon.

'Although the death of Child K could not have been predicted there were indicators that the long-term outcomes for Child K may have been negatively impacted by his parents’ lifestyle.'

Prof Jones also called on the Government to publish guidance on the testing of children for methadone.  'One of the issues we are grappling with is when methadone is being prescribed, it is not being misused,' he said.  'In particular not being used as a tranquilliser or sedative with children.'

Prof Jones added: 'We are looking for the Government to determine what ought to be the national position in relation to the testing of children.'

Annie Hudson, the city council’s strategic director for children and young people’s services, said: 'Bristol City Council fully accepts the recommendations made in the serious case review into the tragic death of Jayden Lee Green.

'The administering of methadone to Jayden Lee was a deliberate act and one for which the parents are now serving a custodial sentences.

'However, at the time of his death there was no evidence of immediate risk to Jayden Lee.  'With hindsight, if we had known he was being given methadone, we would have acted immediately to place him away from harm.

'Many of the recommendations outlined in the findings of the report have already been implemented, including a new working group on substance misuse, revised guidance and protocol for practitioners, a review of services for drug-using patients and arrangements for prescribing methadone.

'Two events to improve and strengthen communications are under way.  'Our legal team has introduced new guidelines on how legal advice is given and improved monitoring of the progress of cases.'


Survey finds majority of Australian parents think it's OK to spank but most opt for other methods

MANY parents believe smacking is an effective way to deter children from misbehaving, but most do not use the controversial method.  Instead, they discipline their children with time-outs and technology bans, a survey suggests.

An adelaidenow poll of almost 1400 people found 39.7 per cent of respondents thought smacking was a useful deterrent, while 36 per cent believed it should be used only in extreme situations.

A further 39.5 per cent said they would be furious if a friend smacked their misbehaving child.

Parent Wellbeing director Jodie Benveniste said the aim of any discipline was to "teach kids to be decent human beings".

"Smacking just doesn't do this and should be avoided," she said.

"Time out, for example, is a much better idea than smacking, as is taking something away the kids value."

Almost 70 per cent of respondents said they verbally told off their children as a method of discipline, while 63.1 per cent said they opted for time-outs.

More than 60.6 per cent ban the use of TV, technology and games and 61.9 per cent deny their child treats.

Smacking ranked fifth on the list, with 43.6 per cent of parents, who said they smacked their children with an open hand.

Dr Justin Coulson, a University of Wollongong research fellow and author of What your child needs from you: Creating a connected family, believes most children misbehave because they are not receiving enough attention from their parents.

Smacking was back in the spotlight last week when a Queensland magistrate ruled that parents fighting for custody of their daughter - diagnosed with a defiant behaviour disorder - must not threaten to smack her.

Almost 60 per cent of respondents to the adelaidenow poll believed courts should not have the power to dictate discipline to parents.

Willunga mum Kate Burr, 37, has recently started using time-outs to discipline her daughter Lily, who turns three on September 20.

"We've been using time-outs for about three weeks now and it's going reasonably well," she said.

Ms Burr said she does not smack her daughter because she cannot justify hitting her.


Norwegian racism

It seems that Breivik is not alone in his views

A hospital in Norway has sacked a Polish cleaner after she was overheard speaking in her mother tongue during work lunch breaks.

Johanna Renclawowicz received a letter saying she was fired from Sykehuset Telemark hospital because 'you have been given information that only Norwegian shall be spoken during working time'.  It continued: 'Your colleagues and hospital users have repeatedly complained that Polish is spoken in the eating area, cleaning department and corridors etc.'

Mrs Renclawowicz was hired as temporary extra help at the hospital in Skien in August last year.

The mother-of-one was one of five Polish cleaners at the hospital and soon after starting was told by a fellow Pole that speaking Polish was banned in the workplace.  She said: 'It was just strange that we were expected to speak Norwegian to each other on our breaks when we’re not that fluent.  'We always tried to speak Norwegian with the Norwegian employees.

'But every time the boss heard one of us speaking Polish, she said, "Speak Norwegian!" She mainly complained if it happened during lunch breaks.'

In January, the hospital’s unit manager began hanging up posters which read: 'At work we talk NORWEGIAN', it is claimed.

Last month, Mrs Renclawowicz received a letter from her unit manager titled 'The use of language in the workplace' in which she was berated for speaking Polish.  The letter added that by not speaking in Norwegian she had created a 'bad working environment'.   Mrs Renclawowicz was warned that if she continued she would be fired.

She said: 'I contacted the Labour Inspectorate which told me that one cannot be dismissed because they speak in their mother tongue during non-paid meal breaks.  'But when I told this to my unit manager, she said that it was "bulls***" and that she could kick me out when she wanted.  'I have never been treated this way before.'

The college-educated 34-year-old from Warsaw said she and her husband had moved to Norway four years ago to find a better life and now have a three-year-old daughter. She said: 'We have a child and a mortgage, so I was devastated when I got the sack. My child is just about to start kindergarten too. Their timing was very bad.'

Mrs Renclawowicz said she will now sue the hospital for discrimination and unfair dismissal.  'I will not proceed with the case because of the money, but because it is a matter of principle. I do not want anyone else to be subjected to the same thing.  'It was bad enough to lose my job, but to lose it under such circumstances was particularly stressful.

'In other hospital jobs, and in many other countries, both doctors and nurses talk together in their mother tongue during breaks in the cafeteria.'

She added: 'I worked hard. One of the fellow Polish workers is a good friend of mine. It is normal we speak Polish with each other but when working we always spoke Norwegian as was requested. Just in our lunch breaks people would speak in their mother tongue.'

Her lawyer, Sebastian Garstecki, confirmed she has now taken legal action against Sykehuset Telemark hospital.

She said: 'The hospital has received notification about our case and has two weeks to respond.  'If they don’t we will see them in court. First and foremost, this is a matter of principle.  'The fact is that an employee speaking Polish at work in an unpaid meal break cannot be seen as a gross breach of duty.  'Her dismissal therefore is unlawful.'

Mr Garstecki added that he had also reported the hospital to the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud, noting that the government agency had previously deemed language directives of this kind to constitute discrimination.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCHAUSTRALIAN POLITICSDISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL  and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine).   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: